tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 15, 2014 10:00am-12:01pm EDT
volunteer force. in order to induce people to want to serve in the military in a time of war, we decided as a nation to increase compensation and increase it substantially, to the point that it is much more expensive to pay a member of the uniformed military to perform some of these functions in a war zone than it is to hire a contractor to perform them. error certainly ethical issues there are some ethical issues versus whether using a contractor. have comeese issues up in using contractors for securities, facilities, embassies, etc. the core issue, the vast majority of contractors are used for food preparation, laundry, and maintenance. it is really just driven by cost. harrison is with
the center of strategic and budgetary assessment. we always appreciate your time. and that is our show for today on "the washington journal." we will see you at 7 a.m. eastern, 4 a.m. pacific. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> only a handful of days left on the congressional calendar before members recess to campaign for the midterm election. both chambers are set to consider a bill the government passed at the end of the september deadline, as well as forceszation for syrian
fighting against isis. legislative business will get underway at 2:00. they will be dealing with 18 suspension builds, -- suspension bills. you can see the house always here on c-span. the senate returns at two eastern today. at 5:30 lawmakers will vote on a bill ensuring men and women receive equal pay for the same work. follow the senate to live on our .ompanion network of a series of hearings get under way tomorrow as defense secretary chuck hagel and chiefs of staff martin dempsey will appear before the armed services committee. secretary of state john kerry will be on the hill later this week. coming up in an hour we will bring you remarks from nato supreme commanders from europe.
current operations, including in ukraine. that will be live at 11 eastern, you will be able to see it here on c-span. documentary filmmaker ken burns speaks to the national press club about his latest project. that is at 12:30 eastern, see it live on our companion network. to announce ited is launch week for the 11th annual student cam documentary contest. in cash prices will be awarded to middle school and high school winners. is the threeeme branches and you. we want you to tell a story about how a policy, law, or action from either the legislative, executive, or judicial branches of the government has affected you come a your life, or your community. indents may work alone or groups up to three.
contestants are asked to produce a five to seven minute video documentary supporting theirs chosen topic. that $100,000 in cash prizes will go to 153 students and 53 teachers. the grand prize winner will win $5,000. -- the deadline is january 20, 2015. >> as part of c-span's campaign 2014 coverage we bring you debates from around the country in key house and senate races. up next the first kansas senate debate between incumbent and gregpat roberts orman. chad taylor did not take part after announcing he has with drawn from the waist -- from the race that she has withdrawn from
the race. >> welcome to the kansas state fair in hutchison. we bring you now the u.s. senatorial debate as the focus. i am former broadcaster with the kansas radio networks. i will be serving as the moderator for the units -- for the u.s. senatorial debate. before i introduce the candidates i will introduce the folks asking the questions. liz is with the kansas radio networks in topeka. we also have two people who were on the governor's panel, michael swanky, reporter anchor and nick sweeney, the managing editor of the hays daily news. our timekeeper is todd, news director in salina. the rules are similar to what we had in the governor's debate. two candidates will have 90
seconds for an opening and closing statement. they will have one minute to respond to questions. the candidate who answers first also will have 30 seconds of rebuttal time. you are not here to listen to me, you are here listen to the candidates. on to the candidates. greg orman, the independent candidate. [applause] >> greg is an olathe, kansas businessman involved with several businesses. he also cofounded the common sense coalition in 2010. mr. orman, your opening statement. >> good morning. my name is greg orman, i grew up in a signal parent family. good morning. my name is greg orman. >> settle down.
>> good morning. i learned to solve problems at a young age. having to share a bathroom guarantees that. i watched my mom struggled to pay our bills and make ends meet. with the help of dedicated teachers, great public schools come i was able to go to college and ultimately start my own business. while i have lived the american dream, i realize that all is not right with america. our system of government is broken. and we all know which. we are sending the worst of both parties there. bitter partisan to care more about pleasing extremists than they do about solving problems. and we have serious problems to solve as a nation, from health care and higher education afford ability to stagnant wages, to living within our means as a country. if we don't solve these problems, our status in the world, our standard of living,
and the very existence of the middle class in america is at risk. i have tried both parties, and i have been disappointed. that is why i am running for the united states senate as an independent. [applause] >> i realize it is difficult to know what to think about nonpartisan candidate. my opponent would like you to believe that i'm a liberal masquerading as an independent. some democrats are starting to call me a conservative. i guess they can't even agree on that. what i am is a fiscally responsible businessman who will work hard to go to washington and solve problems, not play party politics. i will be beholden only to you, not the party boss. [laughter]
[applause] >> senator pat roberts is concluding his third term in the united states senate. yes served in the house of representatives from 1981 to 1997, serving as chairman of the house agriculture committee, and chairman of the senate intelligence committee. he is the senior member of the senate agriculture committee. senator roberts, your opening statement. >> thank you. [applause] [cheers] >> thank you. thank you for wibw for sponsoring this debate. go cats! when bob dole endorsed me for reelection, he said when the world is on fire, and chaos and scandal at home, we must have proven and experienced leadership to safeguard national security, and get our economy on a soundtrack.
there is only one candidate here today that has that experienced leadership. i have a proven record. i have a proven record, and is a senior member of the senate and in finance committee, i look forward to what we get a couple is together under a new republican majority. [applause] >> we must, we must, we must stop the obama agenda. we have to break harry reid stranglehold on the senate. the house has passed, the house is passed over 350 bills, all of which are stuck in the senate. we are now good legislation goes to die. i am the only candidate on the stage who will vote to put harry reid out to pasture, and break the gridlock. [cheers] >> my opponent wants you to believe that he is an independent. he is not. he is a liberal democrat by
philosophy. he has given thousands of dollars to barack obama, hillary clinton, and harry reid. [boos] >> kansas people know better. they won't be fooled by rhetoric. my first vote will be for the majority in the new york senate. you can count on it. [applause] >> before we get to our questions, by the way, i love the enthusiasm that we have seen here so far this morning. but a reminder, please be courteous in responding to each of the candidates, and please refrain from responding until they have completed their statements. the moderator, has the authority to add time to a candidate if they feel like their response has been interrupted by audience members.
you didn't come to hear me, you came to hear the candidates. we would like for that to happen. for those who are undecided and their votes on november 4. let's get to the questions. the first question will come from liz menton you know -- liz montano. >> my question is for either of you to answer. the epa and the army corps of engineers have a proposal have a plan to expand the clean water act. the plan that has come under criticism. critics claim the waters in question are already regulated at the state level. do you support the proposal? >> i do not support the proposal of the government taking over the u.s. water.
[applause] on the last day of the congress, we met with secretary gene mccarthy. nine senators said to her how much damage this was going to do to farmers and rangers. this proposal started out as two pages. anand 63 pages you want to read it. and yet we are supposed to be exempting farmers and ranchers. what we are talking about is farm ponds. farm ponds are supposed to be clean enough so that all the farmers can go swim at a farm upon. that is ridiculous. that's a farm on the know suffers making duck whatever land on. -- would ever land on. i told you to mccarthy, and said no far organization could figure that out. we urged her to back off area let the state control this. our governor has a 50 year water
plan. let's work on that, let's cue the federal government out. she said we might back off, i think she will back off. >> time. >> until the election, then look out. >> i agree that farm ponds should be regularly by the epa. in fact, as a businessman, i have to face regulars in the rune. my father, who owned a furniture store, and stanley kansas, for 41 years, refers to this as the beehive of regulation. we end up facing regulatory burdens from the state, and federal agencies. and i agree, those burdens are inappropriate and bad for business. what i will say is, i think the senator could demonstrate more leadership here. should actually propose changes
to the rules that make it explicitly clear that the epa is not regulating farm ponds. i think that is what he should have one of his staffers do, so that there can be clarity for farmers in the state of kansas. [applause] >> senator roberts, 30 seconds rebuttal. >> greg, i've artie done that. we are ready have a bill. and it is bipartisan. it has the secretary of epa, gina mccarthy, back off. as i said before, think she will, until the elections. and that is the way it is. but my opponent has a record of voting for barack obama. running against me as a democrat. and donating to harry reid. if we didn't have harry reid in the senate, we could consider that bill, and we would take care of it. [applause]
>> the next question comes from michael in wichita. it will go to mr. orman. >> this is for both, i think we have to address it because it has been crazy in the last few days. we were supposed to have three podiums here on the stage. in the last few days, we received news that the democrat in this race decided to take himself out of the race. though his name will remain on the ballot. mr. orman, you said that this news was unexpected. senator roberts, you said this was a corrupt bargain between orman and national democrats. how does this change the race? >> that question is addressed to me. it was unexpected. i have been asked to buy had anything to do with it. all i can say is our progress in the polls was obviously something he had to take into consideration. [applause]
i think the fact that our message is resonating with kansans, that kansas folks do believe that washington is broken. they believe we are sending the worst of both parties. if we want to solve our problems as a nation, we will have to get back into the serious business of problem-solving instead of simply positioning to get reelected. [applause] ultimately, that is what our campaign is about. that is the message that we brought to kansans. that's what lead over 11,000 kansans to sign a petition to get us on the ballot. [applause] >> senator roberts? >> this is the first time i've ever seen national democrats really work very hard to get democrat off the ballot. [laughter]
>> and i have worked with claire mccaskill across the aisle in a bipartisan manner. when claire mccaskill calls the democrat candidate and urges him to get off the ballot, you know something fishy is going on. and i have a message for claire mccaskill. we have had a lot of people from missouri, cross the border, stay in missouri. don't try to mess around in kansas politics. [applause] >> again, my opponent has a record of voting for barack obama, running against me as a democrat, and voting for harry reid. if you want to make change in washington, get rid of harry reid. put them out to pasture. i am the only candidate that can do that. [applause] >> mr. orman, 30 seconds
rebuttal. >> this does create a unique situation. i think it is the first time that i have heard a republican complain about disenfranchising democratic voters. [cheers] >> i want to go to washington to get rid of all partisanship. and to focus on problem-solving. and that is all this is about. [applause] >> the next question comes from net, with the hays daily news. this is to senator roberts. >> the semipermanent rent is the bash does semipermanent residency matter? what are the pros and cons of returning to the district to live in a worse -- live and work. [indiscernible] quick i know more about kansas and anybody else this table. [applause]
>> i have walked with families, i have stood with farmers in the fields of dust during the recent drought. i have been in field underwater when the river flooded. i have been cornered a quarter and border to border. i've been all 105 counties many times. i have been on more main streets then any other public official. as a matter of fact, bob dole just called me and said he is out here trying to catch up. [laughter] i've a fourth-generation kansan, i was born here, educated here, done my life's work here. don't tell me i'm not from kansas. [cheers] >> the people of kansas elected me to go to the u.s. senate.
the u.s. senate is in washington. my home as dodge city, and i am dam proud of it. -- damn proud of it. >> i suspect i have been to dodge city this year more than you have. [cheers] >> how many times? >> i have been there four times. >> i've been about seven, so you are wrong about that. >> a look for the camera roll on that. i probably lived more of my adult years in kansas than you have. but what i will say, to be perfectly candid, is that i don't forget matters. and all the matters where someone lives come i to get matters how they vote. when it comes to voting for kansas, and standing up for kansas values, senator roberts has taken a sharp turn to the
right. he voted against the farm bill, he voted against veterans benefits, he voted against funding for an back, and alternately, maybe the most egregious thing was when the v.a. reform bill came up, he didn't even bother to vote on it. i think that's an affront to all kansas veterans. [applause] >> senator roberts, 30 seconds rebuttal. >> i have worked very hard for kansas, every day that i have had the privilege of public service. i stood up to the president keeping terrorists out of kansas. [cheers] i brought the big redline back to fort riley. i fought to have the world's biggest tanker refueling fleet of mcconnell. i'm responsible for the lewis and clark center being based at fort leavenworth, as the finest military in diversity in the world. i am the proud father of real jobs, real growth, it will transform our economy. i protected and improved crop insurance for farmers. here's a classic example.
he doesn't know the farm bill. >> time it. >> the next question is from liz montano and to be cut. this is towards mr. orman. >> what action should be taken by congress to curb the growing immigration crisis, intensified by an influx of unaccompanied children fleeing central america? >> great question. the immigration crisis in america's an example of what's wrong with washington. when my opponent went into the house of herbs that it is, we had 3 million undocumented people. they we have over 11 million. both parties have had an opportunity to solve this problem. with democrats and republicans have failed to solve it. when i have said is for
immigration reform to work, it needs to be tough, practical, and fair. we just to our borders. we need to make sure we continue our commitment to border security, and secure our borders. by french geoeye mean it is absolutely and fragile to think that we will find to deport 11.5 million people. i think it is advised. there are whole towns that would go away in western kansas. the agricultural industry, the meatpacking industry would go away. i would make it fair to taxpayers? if you are here undocumented, you should register, pay a fine, obey our laws, hold down a job, and pay taxes, and then i think you should be able stay here. let's be clear, this is a problem that both parties have failed to solve. [applause] >> senator roberts? >> secure the border. [cheers] >> no amnesty. [cheers] >> one of the biggest problem we will face in washington is the
president of the united states, who says he will declare by executive order and immigration policy with amnesty. [boos] >> i think it is ironic. we wouldn't have this tremendous problem on the border unless the president of the united states two years ago told people 16 years and under they would not be deported. [applause] >> as a result, we have seen thousands come over the border. we have to secure the border. it is a cute bash a humanitarian problem that has to be done. latest doman, we wouldn't have this problem if we didn't have barack obama and harry reid in the senate. [applause] >> every day, i'm fighting to undo the damage that my rival is caused with his support for obama and harry reid.
[cheers] >> this may surprise some people, but i actually agree that president obama taking executive action on immigration and bypassing congress isn't the right thing to do. i believe we are a nation of laws. as a result of that, i believe that we need to solve this problem legislatively. that is where the failure lies. both parties have had an opportunity to solve this problem, and both parties haven't had the political courage to address it. [applause] >> harry reid the problem. >> the next question comes from michael in wichita. this is addressed to senator roberts. >> kansas continued to lag in job growth. if elected, how would you specifically support job growth
in kansas? >> my record shows -- make it rain. greg, can i have healthier -- help here? >> we want you to be courteous. you can respond to the candidates, but we want both sides to be fair. >> i think the business climate in kansas such that people want to know how to plan ahead. they want certainty. they do not want all this tremendous over both regulations. i have a comprehensive tone regulatory reform, i have every republican vote and 10 covert democrats because they did not want to tell to harry reid. harry reid without lettuce vote on us. -- would not let us vote on it. look at the record. we have the biggest university in america and the world up in
leavenworth, and it will be $3.5 billion to begins economy. i am the father of in bath, we will get it done this session, and it will be the jewel in our effort for the health corridor. this will transform the kansas economy. >> mr. orman? >> i agree with a senator statement that we need to have certainty. what that means is that congress needs distributing its business done. i spoke with the professor who said we would have more growth in the agriculture sector we created certainty in our policy. we would have growth and investment in partners got their act together and let american businesses know that we're going to solve our rental crisis --
financial crisis. getting act together is the first and foremost thing we need to do. i have elton brown businesses my whole life. i've traveled the state of kansas. i know that the industry in kansas is going to require a diverse approach. what we need is not the same thing as manhattan and in the kansas city area. i think we need to take a very distinct approach that distinguishes between the needs of our region in order to create jobs and create growth in the state. >> senator robert? >> getting business done. really.
getting business done and the united states senate. really. 350,000 company house and their gathering best of the senate. this is where good legislation goes to die. it is because of harry reid who will not allow any amendment, republican or democrat, he does not want to put his immigrants online. i'm the only one on this data that can make a republican majority whip harry reid to pasture and get things done. >> the next question comes from the managing editor of hays daily news. it will be addressed to mr. orman. the winner of the winner of this election will play a significant
role in the development of the next farm bill. what do you see as key elements necessary to equip producers with the tools to eat a hungry world -- feed a hungry world? >> the farmers i have talked to run the state say the most important element is the crop insurance program. they need to be able to plant their crops with certainty. we are in a world where we have significantly more uncertain weather patterns. i think that is more vital to the development of the agricultural economy and the farmers of kansas. and water. senator roberts referred to the water plan to move it ails the query to look at the farm bill and make sure that we are not and furtively -- inadvertently encouraging or discouraging the planting of low-water crops. the cost of insuring it through the federal crop insurance program is significantly more
expensive than planting corn. they consume half as much water. we'd make sure that are federal farm programs encourage water conservation so that we can preserve that resource for western kansas. >> senator roberts? >> i think my opponent for bringing up crop insurance. a democrat from nebraska, and i forged it some time ago. i'm the father of that. in this farm bill it was tough because there were enemies of crop insurance. i protective it, i saved it, and we improved it. that is the significant thing that we have done. he says i voted against the farm bill. number one, goes in the wrong direction. many of these farmers are not worried about the low intensity water.
they will now be planting for the government instead of making the decisions themselves. more regulations, and goodness knows we don't need anymore of that. food stamps. if there is ever a program that cries for a reform, it is missteps. -- food stamps. on the basis of that i voted no, but we protected and improved crop insurance. >> mr. orman? >> senator roberts raised food stamps and there is no question, i've said this a lot in the campaign, while it is harder than ever for the average american to get a hint it is also paradoxically easier to do nothing with your life. i think we need to reform the social safety net and look at those programs that are being abused and trying to figure out how to promote upward mobility
and accountability. the ones that are promoting complacency needs to be changed. >> the next question comes from the kansas radio network in topeka. it will be directed for senator roberts. >> military budget cuts up and affecting our troops, the guard has a dual mission to part for our nation and to protect our states, responding to our disasters here at home. what will you do to ensure national guard troops get the needed funding to train for both war and domestic response? >> exempt the military from the sequester. that means more money for our troops. our first responsibility when we
go to washington is to protect our individual freedoms. our national security strategy can be summed up with the president saying we do not have a strategy. we have to have a strategy. with isis, the savage terrorist group will make an american attack, so we must the village and. -- be vigilant. >> i agree with the owner roberts, sequester is a problem. let's remember what it is. sequester is the greatest example of washington's failure to get their act together. as part of a debt ceiling agreement we were supposed to put together the supercommittee, supposedly of the best
legislators from both parties, and they were supposed to come up with targeted cuts to help get our budget back under control. sequester was the penalty provision that was never supposed to happen. no greater example of our inability to get things done in washington. i agree it is a real problem when it comes to her military. i talked to the general maddox, and he gave me a detailed briefing on what sequester will do to troop levels coupled repair does, and readiness command it is a problem that needs to be address. >> senator roberts? >> this was thought up by jack lew and president obama, the man you supported, and the man that you voted for. we would not have this kind of a problem. with regards to the sequester,
the democrat majority exempted all the time of programs and the food stamp programs, and targeted the military thinking that republicans would never go along with them. republicans apprise them because we of $18 trillion debt. so we wanted everybody and esther or not. -- under the sequester, or not. >> if you want to go back and listen to this debate afterwards you can go to our website, wibwnews.com. the next question comes from kwch tv in wichita. >> senator roberts just on this. two american journalists have recently been a kidded by the
provisos. do you agree with the president's actions thus far? what has been done right, what has been done wrong, and how do you think the u.s. should deal with isis? >> isis is a huge issue. we spent thousands of lives of americans, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars, trying to prevent muslim extremists from having a wrong hold in the eastern countries -- a stronghold in the middle eastern countries. the vacuum that we left has caused this. many to do everything in our power to make sure that they cannot stand. airstrikes, absolutely. providing military advice and
counsel to the iraqis, that is actually necessary. the we're going to have to take further measures to be able to address isis. one of the things that we need to consider is that we do not have a properly functioning iraqi government. to solve the problem in that region there going to get a properly functioning government. that is the biggest problem where quite have to deal with. >> senator roberts? >> the president has known for over a year, on his daily briefings, that isis was growing as a threat. and yet we were used to call the war against terrorism a war. osama is dead, and the terrorist threat is over, that was the mantra. that is not correct and the president knew that. and then he says we do not have
a strategy. we have to have a strategy, we have a president that will stand up to the american people and demonstrate exactly what the dangers are to our national security. and then say here is my strategy. then he must come to the congress and seek authorization. i don't know hungry to support that are not spending on what his strategy is between do not even know that yet. but i know that what th -- but i know one thing, i have serious doubts that this president has the will or the ability to conduct any military operation. he has a view of america of leaving by following. and leaving by following has caused all of these voids. >> i think we can go back to the beginning of the iraq war. when the president comes to you
with a plan, you have to consider it. i am happy to hear that he would consider it because previously he said he would fight president obama and that is a much more believable thing. >> our next question comes from the managing editor of the hays daily news. this will be directed to senator roberts. >> where do you stand on the issue of legalization of marijuana in the united saints? -- united states? >> that is not a federal issue. that is a state issue.
if you want to get a rocky mountain high, go west. that should be for the kansas legislature and governor to decide. not federally. >> we have had a federal policy in this country since the next administration that does not seem to be working great way spent spend over a trillion dollars on it. as the senator manchin we do have states that have started to work with different policies as a relates to legalization. i think it would be prudent for us to take a step back, watch what happens in those days before we determine how we want to change federal policy. >> senator would you like rebuttal? >> i do not ever rebuttal. >> the next question comes from the kansas rate in network into being cap.
this will be directed toward mr. orman. >> the patriot act was hammered out in short measure following 9/11 and is now believed by many to be an over whether the federal government which unduly infringes on the rights and civil liberties of law-abiding citizens a case in point could be the reason irs scandal. do feel the patriot act is as is or does need modifications? please elaborate. >> obviously, we passed the patriot act and a time when our country was under attack by terrorists. and we passed it with great intentions. and ultimately with the believe that this was what we needed to do to protect our citizens. i think it is a very fine line that we walked between protecting our citizens and infringing upon their legitimate right of privacy. so what i would say if this is going to be an ongoing debate in our country.
it is not going to be resolved in one election cycle. it will likely evolve. but it will have to the above as threats evolved. given that we have named isis is as a terrorist organization, we need to make sure that we have the ability to reject the on land, particularly if they are get a foothold in the middle east. >> senator roberts? >> i think we have to keep the patriot act because of the terrorist threats that are growing. this is a delicate bounce between civil liberties and our national defense, our safety in america. you mentioned the irs scandal. we have been investigating the iris scandal and that all of the sudden lois lerner lost her hard drive and then there were six others. and so we refuse to sign the democrat report that said we
have been enough and we can get the communication from the white house or the treasury. i wanted tell you there is a member of the finance committee that that is wrong. i said i'm not signing that. i will go to the floor of the senate and i will talk about it. and so finally said we will not sign the report to we get to the truth. the first point that i will have when i go back to washington is an attack by harry reid on all things to change the first amendment. to change the first amendment. and i have five minutes to talk against harry reid. this is the man he supported with money. he is not independent. he is liberal. >> 32nd rebuttal. >> i think we do not live in the
information age as we live in the misinformation age. what senator roberts wants to do is point the very small facts and distort my whole record. i have supported both parties i've been a member of the public and public art -- i've been a member of both parties. and candidly i've been does weighted with both. -- disappointed with both. >> the next question comes fromkwch television -- from kwch television for mr. roberts. >> what is your opinion on candidates receiving money from those outside groups or interests? >> no sense [indiscernible]
i really think the biggest issue of all is transparency. i think if people know where the money is coming from, i think that is the biggest reform we can make. i would also say that under the you citizens united supreme court ruling, they have ruled everybody has the right to free speech. that is the reason that harry reid is going to try to amend the cost is -- constitution. you can holler all you want, but he has that amendment. it says congress can determine how much money we can all get and what is reasonable. that is ridiculous. congress cannot do anything with harry reid at the helm.
>> i have heard you say harry reid, obama and fight a whole lot. what i have not heard from you is solve the problem. what i have not heard from you -- is what you are going to do to get things done. and i think that is what the voters from kansas need to hear from you. i am not taking money from pacs because i want to go to washington and represent only the citizens of i do not want to -- citizens of kansas. i do not want to go to washington and think about what the pharmaceutical industry might be thinking about what i might be doing very i do not want to go and see what the oil
gas industry will be thinking about what i am doing. i want to solve problems for all americans. >> senator roberts? >> i have 40 pieces of legislation covering every part of the kansas economy that is being overregulated by this in a strange and the administration that my opponent is possible for. i cannot get them addressed. no republican can offer an amendment in the senate of the notice days. we're not have a budget in the senate for five years. that is harry reid. that is a one man rules senate. why should anyone believe you are independent?
>> the next question comes from the managing editor of the hays daily news. this question will be for mr. orman. >> what is your stance on gun control in the u.s.? >> i own two guns. i believe in the second amendment. when i got my gun i had to go through a background check. it was a relatively great process. ultimately i was able to buy my gun without delay. i do not think having a loophole that allows people who couldn't get their guns and illegitimate gun dealer is sound policy.
i would eat open to addressing the gun show loophole. and to think about who is denied buying guns it is those who should not have guns. and does not mean that they will not regret having it somewhere else. i just do not think it makes sense to make it easy for a convict appellant or someone who was under a restraining order for domestic abuse to be able to walk into a gun show and easily get a gun. >> senator roberts? >> there you have it. there you have it. he said the second amendment, but, more federal control, more federal requirements.
i am for the second amendment. i have always been. let me point out, many of the things that my appointment has talked about are in law in washington dc. washington dc at the strictest gun control in america. and it has one of the highest crime rates resulting from guns. don't mess with people's right to bear arms with any restrictions. that is what is going to come from the obama administration, that is the man he supported. that is the man he gave money to. >> 32nd rebuttal? >> and a shocking we did not hear the name harry reid in that. it might be --
>> i just miss the opportunity. >> i just thought it was because harry reid sided with you and against background checks. i guess will talk about him when he does not side with you. we do not want people with automatic weapons. those are things that everybody agrees is reasonable. and i think making sure that the convicted felons do not have guns is probably good thing. >> the next question comes from kansas radio network in to the cap -- in topeka. >> social security is the biggest program run by the federal government. if it is acting for everybody in america, but the stability continues to be in question, what course of action would you push for to protect social
security for today's seniors and strengthen it for future generations? >> i'm not going to take away your soul security -- social security. anybody over 55 does not have to worry about a reform measure. you do not have to weigh about it in the next part of the session. harry reid will block federal -- that real quick. the united states is rogue. $18 trillion worth of debt. and at some point in someplace we're going to have to address all of the entitlement programs. but i will tell you one thing, with obamacare taking money away
from medicare, that is a mistake. the medicare reimbursement is causing a crisis to the rural health care delivery system and we have to say medicare, and we must honor the commitments to social security, and we have to fix medicaid. it will happen will we change the congress to a new republican majority and we can make a difference. >> i agree that both chambers of congress are running in an overly partisan way. i agree that harry reid is stopping progress, but so are their publicans in the house. -- the republicans in the house. i like that senator roberts is talking about are $18 trillion debt. but let's not forget in the last decade senator roberts voted for almost every spending bill. the presidential election in
2000 was the only election in my lifetime where we were talking about what to do with surplus. after senator roberts and harry reid -- went through spending, we spend trillions of dollars in the first half of that decade taking surpluses and turning them into deficits. the idea that you're fiscally conservative is not demonstrated by the evidence. >> senator roberts? >> my opponent seems to have forgotten the half $1 trillion cut that i've proposed since obama came to power. parties are not perfect. everybody knows that.
there are some things you cannot compromise on. you cannot compromise on terrorism, you cannot compromise on your kids, you cannot compromise on the future and the fact that you do get the senate turned around. i just want to know when you're good to take a stand and what party you're going to caucus with. are you going to be a republican one day and a democrat the next, and a democrat the next and then a republican? we hate to end on that note but we do need to get to the closing statements. we do have time constraints on what we are allowed to do. you have the first closing statement. >> thank you for a terrific
debate today and thank you to senator roberts for being here. a special thanks to my wife and my family for all their love and support. we believe in the value of hard work. time to elect the senator that shares those values. we are a country that put a man on the moon, that figured out how to harvest the power of the atom, that figured out how to -- i believe that the country and those people when they work together and put their minds together can solve any problem. i reject the false choices that the two-party system resented us with. i believe we can have affordable and high-quality health care. believe we can have secure borders and a humane immigration policy.
i believe we can have a new american century. their if wenot get keep electing partisans instead of problem solvers. i am asking for your vote to get to washington back into the business of solving problems for all americans regardless of party label. we are all americans and we will rise or fall together. [applause] >> senator roberts, your closing statement. m elections determine the future of our country. kansas needs somebody in washington with conviction and a backbone. i don't
either. first he says he is republican and then he says he is a democrat. just this year he becomes an independent. what will he be next year? do you want to risk our children and grandchildren's children to that? that fight must continue. an we must stop president obama from implementing amnesty by executive order. this is a humanitarian crisis. we must secure our border. i will continue that fight will stop my record is clear, proposing nearly half a trillion in spending cuts since obama came to power. i will continue to fight. i will continue to protect our state's role in national security. i am the proud father from
manhattan and my vision is our vision. i will fight to restore the freedom of kansas families to choose their own health care and doctors. i will fight to pass the keystone pipeline. jobs for kansas. all, i will fight every waking minute to restore individual freedoms. stagee only one on this that can be trusted to change the senate. >> that concludes our broadcast. thank you for joining us here live from the kansas state fair. you missed any of that debate or any of our 2014 debate coverage, it's available in our c-span audio library. live pictures now as we await
remarks from the nato supreme allied commander, philip breedlove. you will be discussing the nato summit in wales. we expect this to get underway here in just a few moments. while we wait -- some news from the associated press. members of congress are voting on training. rebels and some are calling for stronger action against islamic state extremists. others are worried about entanglement in a new war. chuck hagel will be briefing members about the key element of president obama's counterterrorism strategy. secretary of state john kerry will also appear before lawmakers this week. we will have coverage on the c-span networks. this from the associated press -- diplomats around the world fighting to -- pledging to fight islamic state militants -- that coming from paris with how to
deal with extremists in iraq. two foes of the united states group have ruled out coordinating efforts. the u.s. has ruled out talks with iran, though they say there will not be any military cooperation. a quick reminder about some of our programming coming up. the house gavels in at noon eastern for speeches. 2:00 p.m. for more brief speeches and then at 4:00 a will begin legislative business. it will start work on 18th suspension bills. one will be reauthorizing childcare subsidies. see the house as always here on c-span. the senate richards at two p.m. eastern, voting on whether men and women get the same pay for the same work will stop you will also see more on the nuclear regulatory commission. senate live on
love, commander of u.s. european command and nato supreme allied commander in europe. will giveinutes, he us his remarks and join a roster of commanders series speakers that include general martin dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and james amos, commandant of the marine corps. the commander series is our long-standing flagship speaker series for allied and military leaders. i want to thank sob north america for their strong and consistent support. you can follow the series if you are interested using the #ac commanders will stop we have more great speakers lined up in this series later in the year, including admiral jonathan greener, chief of naval operations. general lloyd austin, commander of central command, and commander jim kelly, commander of southern command among
others. to joinyou will be able us for these upcoming events as well. today, we cannot be more excited to host general breedlove. he returned from the nato summit in wales where the alliance charted its path for the future while working with how to deal with the brutal rise of isis, russia's invasion of ukraine, and emerging threats around the alliance's southern flank. this is indeed a crucial time for nato and the coming time will help shape the alliance for many decades to come. finally, we would like to consider ourselves the washington home of the dc-based nato -- we are pleased we can help host the top leader of nato military command. this time for his readout on the summit among other things. have thelighted to
general and admiral green who is traveling with him as well as many other members of their delegation. we have some midshipmen from the naval academy and i would like to give them an extra special shout out. it's always good to be in the company of our future leaders. over oflike to turn it my predecessors for some additional comments. general. >> tank you, governor. here to help to be introduce the supreme allied commander of europe will stop i like to spell out that title because it has a special elegance to it that some people around washington don't appreciate. good morning and welcome. it is a real honor to be here. i'd like to recognize the 17 supreme -- 11.
the 11th supreme allied commander. general george allen. always good to see you and thank you for being here. when the recently completed wales summit was completed, it was intended to mark the conclusion of nearly a decade of successful allied operations. alliance -- the assumed many moons ago when i held general breedlove's position. while nato and its partners did have a meaningful discussion on the afghanistan transition, the summit will most likely be remembered for nato's response for russia's ongoing destabilization in ukraine and his discussions about the emerging threat of nato's orders. crisis in ukraine and dramatic rise in tensions have been unwelcome developments in all matters containing 2 -- pertaining to european stability.
has statedecipes and russia's actions in and around ukraine foes the most serious threat to european security since the end of the cold war. yet throughout the crisis, general breedlove has provided remarkable clarity and decisive leadership of allied military forces in responding to a new strategic challenge. in an annual statement delivered to the u.s. congress this spring, general breedlove made a clear and compelling case that america's european allies are force multipliers and a robust posture in europe delivers good value to the taxpayer -- a position i know all of general breedlove's predecessors agree with. has the crisis in ukraine worsened? general breedlove has asked lane and russia's tactics and how they differ from the soviet threat of the past old stop
general breedlove has done more than describe the threat to security. he's pushed for the alliance to continue its transformation and adapt to new threats like cyber security and unconventional warfare. he has holster the readiness of nato military to deter threats in this new environment and, under his traction, nato has organized and is ordinary set of assurance across europe, north, south, east and west come by land, in the air, and on the sea. meanwhile, he and his staff have been hard at work to develop new measures to strengthen nato ross continued presence and readiness in europe's east and north. measures that were blessed that wales and i'm sure general lee -- general breedlove will describe in more detail. he has impacted the alliance the on the ukraine crisis. he's overseeing operations in kosovo, off the barn of africa, and ensuring a peaceful
transition in afghanistan. meanwhile, he's worked to strengthen nato partnerships as part of the alliance bolstering security. he assumed the title of commander of u.s. european command and supreme allied commander europe in may of 2013. by trade with combat experience in the bosnia and coast the up -- and coso conflicts, he has a rich experience in asia and europe and leadership positions in the u.s. air force. he served recently as vice chief of the united states air force and commander of u.s. air force in europe for assuming the best job title in the u.s. military -- supreme allied commander europe will stop it's a great pleasure to have general at the dinner this april and it's a pleasure to welcome him back to the counsel for the nato summit. i'd like to turn the microphone
over now to mr. jonas holmes who will continue the introductions. >> thank you, general jones and thank you avner huntsman. suchnot easy to come up to distinguished general one, but allow me to elaborate a little bit about why we are sponsoring this event. it's a pleasure to have general bead love here today -- general breedlove here today. we've been partners with the counsel for many years now. i think this is a fantastic relationship as both the company and counsel continue to grow. i think we as the north european defense company makes business globally, but also on both sides of the atlantic equal to the
atlantic council. we breathe the transatlantic so to say values and we share them. the events we see around the values, it'sthese even more important than before. this is the core thing for our partnership with the atlantic council to continue to share these values. before the general is giving his remarks, let me add something to general jones describing what the general did before he assumed his, and i agree, very nice title, supreme allied commander. it is something you could kill for to have that title one day. i will not, unfortunately. general breedlove was the commander of air forces in europe and air forces in africa.
from 2008 2 2009, he commanded a third air force out of ram stein, germany. going there, the general served in various positions in the united states airport -- united aids air force. he was these system to the secretary of air force and was the director for strategic plans and policy and was the wise chief of staff for the united states air force. that's just part of a very --ensive and long carrier career you have had. without further delay, help the welcome the general to take the stage. [applause] >> first of all, thank you to the atlantic council for a lot of things.
first of for this opportunity to speak to you. most importantly for all the work it has done through the years in helping shape the policies and positions that take us forward in our position across the northern atlantic. it is about shared values and things that were mentioned. those are the visions we continue to hold for the future despite the challenges we see out there today. cadets, this is your worst nightmare as a speaker. you are standing in front of a crowd, literally two thirds of this crowd are qualified to grade my paper. secondarily, you stand in front of two of the greatest leaders who have had your job before and they know what doing it right looks like. and they are grading me every day about whether i am doing it right or not. it is a privilege to be in such an august group and a group that has the expertise this group has
about the atlantic alliance and our relationships. our thanks to you as i helped to move into what i agree is one of the best jobs in the world. it is quite a challenging job and let's say there's not enough hours in the day to get to everything we need to do. the art of instability we see to our south and now instability we a placeastern europe in where we never would have thought about it in the past, these are challenges that not only in my u.s. european command hat gives us a lot of work to this is artainly challenge that comes already at a very busy time. you don't have to think or a hard about the fact that we still have a lot of work to do in afghanistan. change of mission
under fire, this is no small matter. south fromes in our the mediterranean, eastern, and northern africa area that is clearly still very much on the minds of our southern nato alliance. there are a lot of things that need to be addressed and i will talk more about that in our midst -- in a minute old stop right now, we have just come out of a summit that have a lot of plates in the of air, but one of the central place is how do we address russia? how do we address someone who as roped in the world morals using force to change international boundaries? something we thought was over in
and we see that's not the case. our mission remains the same and nato. that, quite frankly at the summit, and we also began what makes our way forward so important. it goes back to shared values. sometimes that rings a little hollow because it is said so many times, but quite frankly, that is still a center guiding position for what we want to see. and i will say something that maybe a little controversial right now, but i don't think we can ever arrive at europe whole, free and at ease without russia as a partner. for the last 12 years, we have been trying to make russia a partner. basing been making
decisions, force structure decisions, and economic decisions along the fact that russia would be a constructive heart of the future of europe. different a very situation and we have to address that. talk aboutd like to today, and i'm going to roll a few grenades out on the table and we will see where you pick up the pieces, i would like to talk about some of those very important results for the summit. the readiness action plan. our expectations going into the summit were measured. we knew we needed to make some change. we did not know how much change we could affect. i am happy to report we got just about everything we wanted to do. now we are able to implement the changes we made in the readiness action plan.
i think we can reset this alliance for this new challenge that we see in eastern europe. and the changes we make will give us adaptations that will better position us for some of the problems we see in the south. southern fortin to our allied members, that this is not just about the north and the east. it has to be addressing all of our alliance. responsiveness -- we had a magnificent nrs. it did all the things we asked it to do. hardaluated, we look at it , and it meets every expectation we set forward in the past will try toe of the things we make sure people understand is disheartened by what the nrs did in the past.
inadequate for what we see as the future requirement on our forces and capabilities. that is why the readiness action plan will look at a series of edgers that will adapt that an rf. responsiveness, not readiness will stop the readiness is exactly what we asked of it will stop now we ask it to tweak its readiness but make major changes to responsiveness. i am often asked are you trying to deter for sure? i give a second answer. we are trying to do both. we needed immediately to assure our first kickedkraine off, but certainly when the russian forces came across the borders into eastern ukraine. an airman to use an
air force example. 14 hours from go to show, our aircraft left and landed in 14onia and were flying caps hours from go to show. natois assurance, not just power, assuring our allies that we are there and we can be there rapidly if required. assurance to those places and we were tasked to build as the general mentioned a series of measures that are air, land, and sea, north, center and south. the alliance to the magnificent job of doing that. and navallements elements took a little more time, but they are quick and very visible and very assuring
to our nation. i'm sure we hit a 440 foot home run, assuring quickly our nato allies. ?o we deter i will allow you to enter that debate and if you want to talk about in the queue and day, i think it is a good question. looksy when mr. putin and across the borders of these three northern nations, he sees a nato alliance represented by nato forces that are there exercising, preparing all of the things we need to do should we ever have to take action. persistentdible, presence with the ability that is very visible. we looked at nato and asked
see this newwe situation where you can assemble a large force completely equipped that force, bring all the elements of enablers to the ,orce that makes it credible bring forth operational and strategic resupply for that of anall in the name exercise and then boom, the exercise goes across and a nationally respected border and annexes by force a portion of a sovereign nation. how do we react to that. how do we react to that same scenario in the future? pilot --t what a fire a fighter pilot called a three-legged stool. point that ae
three-legged stool, few take any leg away, what happens to it? it also over. these are interrelated, interconnected requirements. the first leg of that stool is we need to change the responsiveness of the nrf. it does what we ask it to do. what we ask it to do is inadequate to the task we see from the scenario i described of this nation not respecting borders and changing borders by force will stop some portion of the nrf will become much more rapidly available for use. how much? that is the discussion we are working on. we put forward some ideas of 48 hours and five days for some of that force, and now we will begin to look at the details of whether that will work. i have other sports analogy. i talk about the goalposts. force,r we do with this
has to go to the gold bars of being affordable and sustainable. andt is not affordable sustainable, it is not critical for the wrong -- for the long run stop we can afford something that looks good and then falls apart. it has to be something that remains with us. changing the is responsiveness of a portion of the nrf, and i'm happy to talk about some of the particulars on that. is it sounds ae tiny bit irresponsible, but for 12 years we have been treating russia as a partner. on a day-to-day basis, we don't have what i would call operational or tactical level headquarters in nato thinking about article five. thinking about collective defense, the ability to defend an ally. clearly in my headquarters we
are thinking about it, but we are not a tactical level headquarters. we need a headquarters element at the core level that will be focused every day, re-hundred 65 days out of the ,ear on collective defense article five responsibilities for the alliance. primarily aimed at the north and east and i will talk about the rest of the alliance in a minute. the second leg of this three-legged stool is a headquarters that feels responsible to the alliance for article five collective defense all day, every day. it won't be their only mission, but it will be their primary mission. --t's the second part command and control capability at speed with tagteam collective defense, article five. the third piece is the more
controversial piece. presence in these nations that does multiple missions for us in peace time that prepares the battlefield, looks at where we can accept put it and allow us to into fight if required. day to day exercises with the local nation which makes nato much quicker to react if required. materials,position works to establish local understanding that would allow a nato force that had to rapidly come toto quickly mission. then in that worst case scenario where we needed it, this
headquarters would be the backbone on which rapidly reacting forces from the new so howre would fall when do we define this forward presence? how do we define its missions and roles? how do we finance forward positioning equipment, etc., etc.. thisu think about three-legged stool i talked about, a rapidly available nrf, command and control structure ready, and a receiving force that on day today is exercising and setting the stage for rapid acceptance of combat power that comes from that newly structured and ra, if
constituted to combat power in that area. of there the three legs stool and details that we will begin to work out. we have already written the paper for the chiefs offense to consider as they come next week to begin to shape these concrete pieces. again, the three legs require each other. some would argue can we do it without this for that and the answer is sure, but it may not work. all three require legs of the stool. happensouraged by what at wales, very encouraged by the solidarity i saw in the alliance and i would hate to over characterize because i don't want to sound too positive.
bet we thought was going to the ceiling of what we were going to get is the floor of what we can expect. we can truly embrace the change and hit the gold coast -- the goalposts were a sustainable future. that is the end of my prepared remarks. now we enter into the more fun part of today's conversation. i will ask for help in choosing who will get to grill me first. [applause] >> i am happy to stand as well. we will see how well we have constructed the stage. all, i want to thank you for taking this time. i think we have all been by her voice in this
moment in history and the claret t -- the clarity of your op-ed in the "wall street journal" was great. the one thing be three-legged rule did not address is what does nato do and what does the alliance do for what we would call gray areas? let me ask this in two parts. what is the situation on the ground in the moment in ukraine? what are you seeing during the cease-fire? if you could take it he on question of general are we drawing 's or can we avoid them? >> many of you have served with me. i see many faces in the crowd of people i have worked with in my life and i hope those who have served with me would say
breedlove is almost always an optimist, because i am. i am well over a glass half full on all manner of things about nato, about the progress we made at wales, about the solidarity we see in our alliance -- absolutely rock steady commitment for article i've defense of nato allies. some things are incredibly positive and well over half full. vein, itell you in that am a glass less than half full on what is happening in ukraine. rather than get into a long discussion of what russia's actions have been, they have were a series of days been reducing their force presence but they have left behind some very capable and tailored force that allows them to bring on presidentssure
poroshenko in the leadership of ukraine and what that pressure allows them to do is completely shake the geostrategic context of eastern ukraine. i've been quoted as saying and i will say it again this these fire while it has done many good wings like stop the loss of allowing the situation to be built in eastern ukraine that could easily slip into another conflict. me greatly in eastern ukraine. areas, wethese gray have a great commitment and rocksolid commitment to our nato allies and what that means. i think the western world needs to come to grips with what is it
that is going to happen in the states that are outside the alliance and between the alliance and russia. what are the expectations of nations for foundations will conduct themselves? atlantic council and others to begin to ponder the pressure for those not in the alliance and what would be the pressure for those who try to exploit it? talk to us a little bit about what you are seeing and watching on the ground in ukraine. what is the russian military strategy? people talk about hybrid
warfare, but from the standpoint of your position, what is that? what we areeen terming as hybrid warfare in the early stages of what happened in eastern ukraine. we watched this play out in becameand hybrid warfare an overt mission as russian troops moved into crimea and consolidated their position. script layout in eastern ukraine. , theittle green men deniable forces, deniable presence and how that was shaping the support to the russian backed forces. some of them call them pro-russian forces in eastern ukraine, but what we saw is
ukraine was actually able to assemble a military force and reshape the ground. greatkrainian forces rot pressure on those russian backed horns. now we are on the see ae russian federation defeat in eastern ukraine? can they see their forces in cut off by ukrainian forces who are having success? a tough of a hard-fought title on both sides. ukraine,e successes in and what you clearly saw was those successes were not acceptable to moscow. the russian forces went from hybrid warfare, indiscriminate little green men, to an overt action by three armored russian
coast. and along the tide onrces turned the what happened in eastern ukraine and reestablished wide-open support so russia could bring resupply to those forces in and now begin to bring great pressure along the coastline that weretwo ports key to ukraine's the school ability to move forward. that is where we see ourselves now. nowlines of support are i think thed cease-fire, those lines will run a old told. force some of the russian ringing great pressure and you
can look at that in two ways. it is either a coercive force to say meet our terms or else, or it is a force well-suited for taking that if it is required. know, we willyou have ukrainian president here on thursday after his joint session with congress. this final question for me, you're three-legged stool i thought was a very good image. i won't deal with the rapid reaction force, but you mentioned the forward resins is the most controversial. what is required for an incredible presence and what triggers the fort -- the forward presence? >> let me recharacterize your question just a little bit will forwardhink we need a
presence right now. as ascribed this persistent presence and it will be a persistent presence enabled by rotational forces. how long those rotations are will be decided by much more smart men and women who do that kind of planning and look at duration versus understanding the mission versus other pieces full top but i believe we need a persistence -- persistent presence enabled by a significant duration so we are not relearning something every three months. think in peace time, it has lots of duties. exercise with the host nation to bring everybody's in the latina up and everybody's interoperability up. establish an area where if we needed to, we could rapidly bring force for word.
today, we can relatively rapidly take forces into nation like his, but when they land, you have to figure out where is my supply, where is my lodging? where's my forward position? now we will have a force in these areas doing all of the preparatory work such that they are available to rapidly receive this new portion to build to a combat capability. area, there will be some command and control. we need to rotate through some of the enablers so they can work with the host nation to understand the challenges and things that need to be done. we need fire supporters in their to understand how you would use fires to support business. we need communicators to establish and work out the lines this isnications. who
how we resupply and how we move forward and these are the things we need to put here in pre-position so it is available. all posts of enablers need to be part of that rotation so we can work the squeaky wheel and get it already to go. sitting in a command-and-control capability ith some forces attached, if is ready to receive, we know sore our ammunition kit is that we can rapidly fight if we have to in that worst of cases. model andking at that how we would define that model. important point at this point now that we have the agreement for the requirement is ,o hit those old posts
affordable and sustainable. >> to article five is harder than it used to be. it can be a cyber attack. unlikely to be a? tank heading across the border. article five, how do you look at all that? >> there is a broad series of questions we are asking ourselves. you hit two of the hardest ones for the cyber -- what constitutes an article five? frankly, we have not been addressing that. after the summit in wales, we agreed there's work to do on what cyber means in this context. on the flip side, to the little green men, we have seen the script play out in crimea and seen the scripts layout in eastern ukraine.
we are beginning to see it in moldova and we are beginning to understand this whole track of how this hybrid board will be brought to bear. what we have to do is look at those forces in our border nations where there are substantial russian populations and how do we better prepare those nations to survive the initial onslaught of this hybrid war? i think what we all understand is this hybrid war, if it kicks off and is on attributable, this is not a nato issue. issues internal to that and and am alive problem in most nations. how do we better prepare our allies to characterize, understand, and survive the initial onslaught of the little green men scenario? clearly, we have great
attribute that if you this little green men issue to an aggressor nation, that is an article five action and all assets of nato come to bear. >> very interesting attribution. right here and i will try to get your questions. identify yourself before you give your questions will stop >> i'm a consultant with u.s. special operations. he talked about enablers, general jones has left, but he --ng with the rear admiral >> which is a huge success, by the way. >> there has been pushed back on talk to howyou
effective you think the special operations commander has been? >> absolutely amazing. quite frankly, what you have seen out of the special are multipleit operations in afghanistan are a result of this exact effort to stop the sharing of tactics, techniques come and procedures, bringing everyone to a nato standard, interoperability of kit, interoperability of our forces together as they work in afghanistan, it's a huge success and is a great force multiplier for nato. helping our nations understand how to handle themselves when they are under the onslaught up until it is a tribute it. i am francis cook.
very the street on one member in turkey. i would like to talk about how they are working to support heisel with seville -- with facilitating the arrival of jihadi's old stop we all have hostages. rare to see ary nato member turn on western policy like this. i'm wondering what the impact is on what you're trying to do in nato. >> here is what i would like to say about turkey. is and to remember turkey important ally in the nato alliance. turkey is in a pretty tough place.
they have a neighbor to the north which we used to think was a partner we have put in place in crimea the ability to put surface to air missiles to pretty much dominate the black see and have messaged us pretty hard on their ability to exert their influence on the black sea. caught theurkey, is between a rock and a hard place. i think we need to understand the context of turkey in that way. the good news is our alliance has responded as you know, as we are actively involved in air defense to the south and we have help them understand what is inng on along their border the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance place. i'm
going to disappoint you because i'm not going to address the political piece of this. what we need to focus on right now is we have a member of our alliance that we have shown our ask them andnd we it's a conversation for then. >> congratulations on a very good op-ed in the "washington post." >> general, in ukraine, what you said about forward appointments, what we are doing for allies, is that feasible to do for ukraine and would it help if we could do that not so much to prepare for rapid reaction force to come, but to support ukrainian forces as a deterrence matter to try to halt the russian advance where it is.
they at least have to undertake an action bigger than they would it is prudent for them to move beyond where they are. >> let me broaden the question again. i'm going to get a little more specific answer. i think the line of logic you just used is exactly what i think the western world and to some degree our nation needs to look at. there are these nations outside of nato and not russian, literally in some cases between us. how does the western world wrote those nations and what are the expectations of all of our neighbors east and west as to what their actions should be? what are accepted international norms? this is the first principle
conversation. then you can begin to look at what are those assurances we could give these nations and we would be an interesting personal pronoun. is it nato? is it a coalition? is it bilateral? right now there is no nato policy on what to do and those nations that are in themselves not in the alliance and the russian federation. where i hope the atlantic council can have a conversation along these lines. how do we approach these exact conundrums? >> thank you, very much. here in front and amigo on the right. >> would you anticipate in the
in whichercises elements of the nrf or other elements move to practice enforcement in the lodgment areas? >> yes. >> i'm being flip by that one word answer, so let me elaborate and i hopefully had the effect. most amazingof the rapid reacting forces out there. i think you would agree with me. you and others on these very's short strings are truly incredible forces. you don't have that force if you don't exercise that wars and and sometimesarly off schedule. you don't know if you have a 48 hour force unless you respond.
part of the original conversation we had with the leaders of the summit is that this would be an expectation that we would exercise elements of these forces at speed in order to ensure we had the speed . the short answer is yes. >> following the nato summit, the last summit, what do you think about candidate countries macedonia, so that interference in georgia and ukraine can be prevented? >> this is a hood question to ask a military leader versus a
military -- versus a political leader. how do you look at? >> what we have reaffirmed is that the door is still open. no one moved through the door in the summit at several have their programs of engagement him through and most notably, ukraine and others have their program of engagement improve. there are lots of things nations need to do to come across that barrier into nato. makeld reserve now to remarks toward the military pieces of those because those the things i understand most. some of the nations like georgia have done an extremely good job of the coming interoperable with nato and deploying with nato. georgia has deployed in a constant and high level its
forces in afghanistan. nations that continue to move toward their goal or have already in some cases met military expectations for their entry into nato, now some of their more political issues are being worked out by the political leadership. for my general breedlove. i can only take two more questions. this young man here. have to be the last two questions. how are you keeping the administration's i on russia with everything happening with ices right now and with the european reassurance initiative, how would you like to see that spent?
ask if just wanted to that is set to give a evocative signal to boot and. those ilogize to all of was unable to get to. grosshink it would be a misstatement that i would keep our government is on anything. clearly, we have a lot of challenges out there. ices orlenge of whatever we call these guys is an incredibly tough problem and clearly deserves a lot of our focus stop i think we have a government that completely understands that we have got to address what russia is doing in eastern europe and working through those issues, a very active bait inside the beltway about how to address, so
sometimes what we see in the headlines, things that tell us we may be focused on one thing at the expense of another, i don't think our government is completely focused on these issues. to see the ongoing work of how we address this, i worry less about that. remind me the second part of your question. eri is great. in my opinion, it offers us a great tool to begin to do all of those things we need to do to address the three-legged stool. we need u.s. forces be part of that small, rapid reacting part of the nrf. others stepseveral up to beast -- to be part of
that force. are wello make sure we set to be a part and be a big part of that rapid react. the third piece, our presence forward, in some cases, i believe eri will help us the , settingonditioning forward as with other nato allies those pre-positioned materials we think we need in some of those areas and will allow us to enable that will itp i have great hopes for to be an enabler of exactly what we needed to do for that third leg of the stool. i see that very well. back to the exercise -- this exercise has been on the books for years and is an exercise we do every year. we are continuing to exercise today. it is a little over a thousand
apple and 14 nations. a piece operation. it is about ringing nations together to be able to interact and interrelate. kilometers -- >> we will leave this event here. you can see all the on our website. the u.s. house is about to gavilan for speeches and legislative business. now live to the house floor. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., september 15, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable thomas e. petri to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the ke